• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

肝细胞癌的肝移植:拟议的加州大学旧金山分校标准与米兰标准及匹兹堡改良TNM标准的比较

Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of the proposed UCSF criteria with the Milan criteria and the Pittsburgh modified TNM criteria.

作者信息

Yao Francis Y, Ferrell Linda, Bass Nathan M, Bacchetti Peter, Ascher Nancy L, Roberts John P

机构信息

Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0538, USA.

出版信息

Liver Transpl. 2002 Sep;8(9):765-74. doi: 10.1053/jlts.2002.34892.

DOI:10.1053/jlts.2002.34892
PMID:12200775
Abstract

We previously proposed modified staging criteria for predicting acceptable outcome after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). These were solitary tumor < or = 6.5 cm, or three or fewer nodules with the largest lesion < or = 4.5 cm and total tumor diameter < or = 8 cm, without gross vascular invasion (University of California, San Francisco [UCSF] criteria). In this study, we further evaluated the performance of the Milan criteria (solitary tumor < or = 5 cm, or three or fewer lesions none > 3 cm), the UCSF criteria, and the Pittsburgh modified tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) criteria. Pathologic HCC staging according to each set of criteria was performed in 70 patients. The difference in survival when comparing 24 patients with HCC exceeding Milan criteria versus 46 patients meeting Milan criteria did not reach statistical significance (HR, 2.0; P = .12). Using our definition for acceptable 2-year survival to be > or = 70%, the 14 patients (20%) meeting UCSF criteria but exceeding Milan criteria had a 2-year survival of 86% (95% CI, 54% to 96%). Survival for Pittsburgh stage I, II, and IIIA patients as a group was significantly better than for stages IIIB and IVA patients combined (HR, 4.2; P = .007), and similar to survival for patients meeting UCSF criteria. Advanced tumor exceeding UCSF criteria served reasonably well as a surrogate marker for poorly differentiated grade and microvascular invasion. In conclusion, our analyses suggest that UCSF criteria better predict acceptable posttransplant outcome than Milan criteria. UCSF criteria confer a different advantage over Pittsburgh criteria, which require information on microvascular invasion that is difficult to ascertain preoperatively without the attendant risk of biopsy.

摘要

我们之前提出了改良分期标准,用于预测肝细胞癌(HCC)原位肝移植(OLT)术后的可接受结局。这些标准为单个肿瘤≤6.5 cm,或三个及以下结节,最大病灶≤4.5 cm且肿瘤总直径≤8 cm,无肉眼可见血管侵犯(加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校[UCSF]标准)。在本研究中,我们进一步评估了米兰标准(单个肿瘤≤5 cm,或三个及以下病灶,均不大于3 cm)、UCSF标准以及匹兹堡改良肿瘤-淋巴结-转移(TNM)标准的性能。根据每组标准对70例患者进行了病理HCC分期。比较24例HCC超过米兰标准的患者与46例符合米兰标准的患者,其生存差异未达到统计学意义(HR,2.0;P = 0.12)。按照我们对可接受的2年生存率≥70%的定义,14例(20%)符合UCSF标准但超过米兰标准的患者2年生存率为86%(95% CI,54%至96%)。匹兹堡I期、II期和IIIA期患者作为一个整体的生存率显著优于IIIB期和IVA期患者合并后的生存率(HR,4.2;P = 0.007),且与符合UCSF标准的患者生存率相似。超过UCSF标准的进展期肿瘤可较好地作为低分化分级和微血管侵犯的替代标志物。总之,我们的分析表明,UCSF标准比米兰标准能更好地预测移植后的可接受结局。与匹兹堡标准相比,UCSF标准具有不同的优势,匹兹堡标准需要微血管侵犯的信息,而术前若无活检带来的相关风险则难以确定。

相似文献

1
Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: comparison of the proposed UCSF criteria with the Milan criteria and the Pittsburgh modified TNM criteria.肝细胞癌的肝移植:拟议的加州大学旧金山分校标准与米兰标准及匹兹堡改良TNM标准的比较
Liver Transpl. 2002 Sep;8(9):765-74. doi: 10.1053/jlts.2002.34892.
2
Impact of UCSF criteria according to pre- and post-OLT tumor features: analysis of 479 patients listed for HCC with a short waiting time.根据肝移植术前和术后肿瘤特征的加州大学旧金山分校标准的影响:对479例等待时间短的肝癌登记患者的分析。
Liver Transpl. 2006 Dec;12(12):1761-9. doi: 10.1002/lt.20884.
3
Liver transplantation outcomes for early-stage hepatocellular carcinoma: results of a multicenter study.早期肝细胞癌的肝移植结局:一项多中心研究的结果
Liver Transpl. 2004 Nov;10(11):1343-54. doi: 10.1002/lt.20311.
4
Recurrent hepatocellular carcinoma after transplantation: use of a pathological score on explanted livers to predict recurrence.肝移植后复发性肝细胞癌:利用移植肝的病理评分预测复发情况。
Liver Transpl. 2007 Apr;13(4):543-51. doi: 10.1002/lt.21078.
5
Liver transplantation criteria for hepatocellular carcinoma should be expanded: a 22-year experience with 467 patients at UCLA.肝细胞癌的肝移植标准应扩大:加州大学洛杉矶分校467例患者的22年经验。
Ann Surg. 2007 Sep;246(3):502-9; discussion 509-11. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318148c704.
6
Liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma in patients beyond the Milan but within the UCSF criteria.对超出米兰标准但符合加州大学旧金山分校标准的肝细胞癌患者进行肝移植。
Eur J Med Res. 2006 Nov 30;11(11):467-70.
7
Role of Pittsburgh modified TNM criteria in prognosis prediction of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.匹兹堡改良TNM标准在肝细胞癌肝移植预后预测中的作用。
Chin Med J (Engl). 2007 Dec 20;120(24):2200-3.
8
Predictors of long-term survival after liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma.肝细胞癌肝移植术后长期生存的预测因素。
Am J Gastroenterol. 2005 Dec;100(12):2708-16. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2005.00289.x.
9
[Indication of liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma: Shanghai Fudan Criteria].[肝细胞癌肝移植指征:上海复旦标准]
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2006 May 16;86(18):1227-31.
10
A prospective study on downstaging of hepatocellular carcinoma prior to liver transplantation.肝移植前肝细胞癌降期的前瞻性研究。
Liver Transpl. 2005 Dec;11(12):1505-14. doi: 10.1002/lt.20526.

引用本文的文献

1
The risk of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after liver transplantation increases with locoregional therapies in patients initially within Milan criteria.对于最初符合米兰标准的患者,肝移植后肝细胞癌复发风险会因局部区域治疗而增加。
Hepatobiliary Surg Nutr. 2025 Aug 1;14(4):539-551. doi: 10.21037/hbsn-24-107. Epub 2024 Sep 5.
2
Management of hepatocellular carcinoma prior to liver transplantation: latest developments.肝移植前肝细胞癌的管理:最新进展
Hepat Oncol. 2025 Dec;12(1):2549676. doi: 10.1080/20450923.2025.2549676. Epub 2025 Aug 23.
3
Navigating the Complexities of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Management: Optimizing Liver Transplantation Outcomes Through a Multifaceted Approach.
应对肝细胞癌管理的复杂性:通过多方面方法优化肝移植结果
J Clin Exp Hepatol. 2025 May-Jun;15(3):102548. doi: 10.1016/j.jceh.2025.102548. Epub 2025 Mar 18.
4
Evolving Transplant Oncology: Evolving Criteria for Better Decision-Making.不断发展的移植肿瘤学:用于更好决策的不断演变的标准。
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025 Mar 24;15(7):820. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics15070820.
5
Outcomes of liver transplantation for hepatocelluler carcinoma from living donor versus deceased donor within University of Southern California San Francisco criteria: a report from Turkey.按照南加州大学旧金山标准比较活体供体与尸体供体肝移植治疗肝细胞癌的疗效:来自土耳其的一份报告
Front Oncol. 2024 Aug 22;14:1419740. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1419740. eCollection 2024.
6
The clinical outcomes of patients with vascular invasion after deceased donor liver transplantation.已故供体肝移植术后发生血管侵犯患者的临床结局。
J Gastrointest Oncol. 2024 Aug 31;15(4):1686-1697. doi: 10.21037/jgo-24-328. Epub 2024 Jul 31.
7
Impact of pre-transplant immune checkpoint inhibitor use on post-transplant outcomes in HCC: A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.移植前免疫检查点抑制剂的使用对肝癌移植后结局的影响:一项系统评价和个体患者数据荟萃分析。
J Hepatol. 2025 Jan;82(1):107-119. doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2024.06.042. Epub 2024 Jul 10.
8
Oncologic Outcomes of Interventions to Decrease Allograft Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury within Patients Undergoing Liver Transplantation for Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Systematic Review.肝癌患者肝移植中减少移植物缺血再灌注损伤的干预措施的肿瘤学结果:系统评价。
Curr Oncol. 2024 May 21;31(6):2895-2906. doi: 10.3390/curroncol31060221.
9
Impact of Pre-Liver Transplant Treatments on the Imaging Accuracy of HCC Staging and Their Influence on Outcomes.肝移植前治疗对肝癌分期影像准确性的影响及其对预后的影响。
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Mar 4;16(5):1043. doi: 10.3390/cancers16051043.
10
Transplant Oncology: An Emerging Discipline of Cancer Treatment.移植肿瘤学:癌症治疗的一门新兴学科。
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Nov 9;15(22):5337. doi: 10.3390/cancers15225337.